Baltimore County voters will decide whether to strengthen the protection of the county’s rural area.
The County Council Monday night agreed to put on the November 2026 ballot the question of whether to make it more difficult to move the county’s Urban-Rural Demarcation Line, known as the URDL.
The URDL divides the county into two sections and restricts development in the more rural areas.
Republican Councilman David Marks, the lead sponsor of the legislation, said he hopes the issue will be debated in school cafeterias, lecture halls and fire halls throughout the county leading up to the 2026 election.
“The voters could turn this down,” Marks said.
Council Chairman Mike Ertel, a Democrat, voted for the legislation, saying it will help to protect the county’s water supply and farmland.
“It’s good for the public to reexamine what the URDL is all about and hopefully that will happen when we put this to the voters,” Ertel said.
Voters rarely vote against proposed charter amendments.
Democratic Councilman Julian Jones, who along with fellow Democrat Pat Young voted against the legislation, warned that when it comes to proposing strengthening the URDL the council should have let sleeping dogs lie.
He said the people who are living in the heavily developed area inside the URDL could object to strengthening it because they are subsidizing those who live in the more rural areas.
“The tax base of Baltimore County is generated from inside the URDL,” Jones said. “Where the people are, they generate the taxes.”
The proposal would put in the county charter the requirement that a supermajority of council members would be needed to change the URDL.
Council members Monday night jettisoned from the legislation an additional requirement that would have given veto power to a council member who represents the district where the movement of the URDL was being proposed.
Opponents said it would have given individual council members too much power. Democratic Councilman Izzy Patoka, who offered up the amendment to scratch that part of the legislation, said requiring a supermajority vote was enough to protect the URDL.
But Republican Wade Kach, who represents the rural third district, said he was disgusted that the idea of “councilmanic courtesy,” which is the tradition of allowing a council member to decide the fate of development in their district, was taken out of the legislation.
“Any effort to exclude constituents from a decision is the wrong decision,” Kach said.
